iPhoto '11 TROUBLE

franklahm wrote:
My iPhoto Lib is 12 GB big and resides on an AFP volume. It's not ta snappy, but perfectly usable.

Similar size to what I've tested with on average, but I've also gone up to ~30GB. In no sense was iPhoto usable for anything but the smallest of libraries (few hundred - upto 1000 photos) - I could wait 5-10 minutes just for iPhoto to start, and this was even with a brand new library of just imported photos. And I have seen many posts here and on other forums stating similar issues.

My last test was ~3 months ago using a brand new Ultra-4, a 3GHz iMac, connected via a Netgear GbE switch which has shown no issues previously, and 2m CAT6 cables. I tested along side iSCSI support (as did other users at the time) and there was just no comparison. iSCSI worked fine with no noticeable performance difference between the iSCSI host library and an local library, whereas over a network protocol it was unusable.

To quote another user who tested the same at the time but with the Ultra-6, i7 based iMac and Netgear GS108 switch: "I got the iphoto copied onto an afp share and it working but very slowly. Takes about 60 seconds or more to come up and quitting took forever. so long I did a force quit a few times because I got sick of waiting. So it works over afp but not very well..."

No it's not the same. CIFS gave him "not supported" because probably iPhoto 11 indeed checks if the Lib resided on a smb-vfs volume. He had an entirely different error with AFP.

You are quite correct - apologies - I was mixing things in my mind. But as I said, Apple have a history of doing such things - as in the last release with iMovie. If CIFS is now prevented, and AFP performance is poor as every test I've ever done over the last 2.5 years of having ReadyNAS devices has shown - I stand by my assertion that these applications just are not suitable for storing their libraries on a network share.

You are the first I've ever heard state that performance is acceptable, soI'd really like to understand is what is different about your setup to see if there is something that I've missed and can try

One idea comes to mind - I'm judging based on iPhoto '09 (and previous versions). Maybe iPhoto '11 actually does work very well with AFP and that's the difference. But based on history I'd be very surprised and in checking the available info on iPhoto '11 I see nothing that indicates improvements for libraries on network shares.

Maybe the OP can also try AFP and report back.

Afair we've got a large customer using Aperture across AFP with huge asset stores just fine. So at least it depends.

If you are correct, again I'd really like to understand their setup to figure what is different.

But are you sure the library is hosted on the AFP volume and not just the photos? Referencing photos on an AFP volume works perfectly and is ea key feature of Aperture, but try hosting the library itself or even a backup vault via AFP and performance again dies to the point of being unusable. I actually moved to Aperture in part to enable me to reference photos on the NAS. I host my library locally and now back it up to the NAS via iSCSI